[CoLoCo] virtualization in hardy: kvm

[Neal McBurnett]

On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 09:35:07AM -0600, Kevin Fries wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-03-14 at 23:45 +0100, Soren Hansen wrote:
> > A standard build of KVM will - if the CPU extensions are not available -
> > fall back to non-accelerated mode, which *is* qemu. If that feels faster
> > than qemu, that's not much more than a statistical anomaly, I think.  I
> > have no benchmarks to back this up, but KVM and VirtualBox should
> > provide about the same performance.
> 
> KVM does not fall back, it fails.  I tried this, and it tells me it will
> not run the post install script from the apt-get.

I think this has worked for me in the past, as Soren says.  So if it
isn't working for you, then can you point us to a bug report, or at
least indicate which distro, release and hardware you were working
with in this case?

> That is my problem with it.  I would rather focus on an industry
> standard product that works, and is free, than on that has been plagued
> with problems and is open source.  Reality is a cruel mistress.  I also
> see this as one of the key problems with Bug #1.  Geeks like me aside,
> most people just want stuff that works.  The do not care about open
> source.  They see VMWare, VBox, KVM, and Xen all in the same light.  I
> do not have a problem with KVM being in the repositories, but VMWare is
> the industry leader, and is the solution people are looking for.  That
> should be our focus.

We've already clarified that VMWare and Canonical continue to work to
improve how VMWare works on Ubuntu systems, to the extent that
VMWare's licensing permits.  You'll have to ask VMWare to loosen their
licening to get any further.  Please don't complain to Ubuntu folks.

> > >>> VMWare server is free to use, period.  
> > >> If you accept the terms of use and obtain a license key, yes.
> > >> Exclamation point![1]
> > > So what!!!
> > 
> > Er... So it's not "free to use, period.". If you don't care about the
> > difference between free beer and free speech, that's your "problem".
> 
> Again, you are confusing the goals of Ubuntu with Gobuntu.

It is you that seem to be confused.  There are a few unusual
exceptions in which Ubuntu will ship proprietary code in the
restricted section of the repositories.  This is done so that we can
expand the set of hardware which can get basic Ubuntu video and
networking support, and it is done under circumstances in which we are
allowed to ship the bits in question.  That is the stuff that gobuntu
doesn't ship.

The fact that VMWare is in Canonical's Partner repository rather than
Ubuntu's multiverse suggests to me that VMWare won't allow Ubuntu to
ship it.  So again you have to talk to them.

> > > I put this into the same category as Acrobat.  Evince does not do as
> > > nice a job, but everyone fawns over it because its open source.  Again,
> > > so what!  Instead, I guess I take a more broad look at these types of
> > > things...

This also nicely demonstrates the licensing quandry.  Because Adobe is
so restrictive about how acrobat is distributed, even though you would
call it "free", people have to jump thru hoops to get it.  The same is
true of flash vs gnash, and as a result of Adobe's decision to release
a new version with extra requirements, and take away the old one, many
many folks were left high and dry.  And again, an unfortunately large
number of folks complained to the kind Ubuntu volunteers who were
trying to make life easier and keep Konquerer working, rather than
complainging to Adobe.  The same could happen to VMWare some day.  So
again, use it if you like, but I'll bet on truly free software, as in
speech.

> > I'm struggling to figure out why you work on Linux?
> 
> <warning>
> <long_political_rant>

It isn't Ubuntu that has a problem with commercial packages -
multiverse is there.  It is the control-freaks at Adobe and VMWare....

> Real competition comes when companies are all given an equal footing,
> and equal chance in the market place.  You can not figure out why I am
> in Linux because you are as bad as Microsoft.  In your world, everything

When you call Soren, one of the stars of the Ubuntu world, "as bad as
Microsoft", I get REALLY ANGRY!  Please listen better and you'll see
that we're all actually wanting pretty similar things, but are being
thwarted by the commercial folks in question.

> must be better if it is open source, and evil if it is commercial.  I
> see a place where both could (and should) live side by side.  Free
> software, whether open sourced or not, should always be available to
> everyone.  It should be based upon standards that allow all OSes to play
> evenly.  Whether that software is open sourced, or a free commercial
> product, I have less concerns, as long as it is based upon a standard
> that all players must abide by.  Commercial software should allow
> feature and usability enhancements upon the free software, or technical
> support.  It is only in this way that everyone can be served in a free
> (as in speech), clean way.

Again, it is the commercial folks who are refusing to abide by your
rules.  And I wouldn't expect them to - they are free to make a profit
however they like.

If you want the sorts of level playing field you talk of, I think your
best bet is to support Free-as-in-speech software.  That has worked
for me, over 20 years, whether I was working for the biggest company
in the world or as a consultant on my own.  And please don't blame
Ubuntu folks for the way the rest of the world works.

> We start by enforcing standards, real standards like ODT, and not
> f(&*^ed up standards like OOXML.  Then we make that standards mandatory.
> If Microsoft want to make a copy of MS Word that is free to the public,
> and supports ODT as its native format, I say welcome to the party.  Come
> on in, the water is fine.  If MS decides that they want to make OOXML as
> an optional format so that their users can communicate with their
> commercial product, I say fine to that also, just so long as the
> standards based functionality is the default behavior, and the OOXML is
> only available as a save as option.

In the case of Microsoft, because they are a monopoly, these sorts of
additional restrictions might be legal and reasonable, but again this
is not the place to push for them since it distracts us from the work
at hand....

> Given this philosophy, it should not be hard to see why I am in Linux.
> I believe everyone should be given the opportunity to build a better
> wheel and put it on the market.  Every product, both FOSS and commercial
> should be based upon its merits, and judged by it cost vs benefit.
> Personally that is all I am looking at.  You are only looking at whether
> somebody will let you look at the code.  I know this is a long running
> argument, and Mark has shown repeatedly a practicality similar (though
> maybe not as radical) as mine.  The restricted drivers are a perfect
> example (See Mark Shuttleworth's blog posts if you want more details, I
> will not speak on his behalf).  You are making the Gobuntu argument all
> over again.  Its been made, and while not completely rejected, was
> mostly rejected... that is why we have the Gobuntu distro now.  Ideals
> are great, and the ones you are holding on to I would even consider
> noble, but they are not always practical.
> </long_ploitical_rant>
> </warning>

If I'm wrong about whether VMWare would allow its server product to be
in multiverse, by all means make the case for inclusion (though I'm
not sure exactly what that process is - anyone know?).

> > > It is for this reason that I use nVidia video cards, I use Firefox web
> > > browser, I use OpenOffice productivity suite, I use Adobe Acrobat to
> > > view PDF files, and I use VBox (i.e. to run a Windows instance on my
> > > desktop using the seamless mode feature so I can run Visio) and VMWare
> > > (generally for virtual servers on a dedicated Linux server).
> > 
> > What is this seamless mode of which you seem to be so fond?
> 
> VBox will allow me to run my Windows desktop on top of my Linux desktop
> in one integrated view.  Since I run the AWN launcher, I tell Windows to
> "auto hide" its startbar.  When I want to run a Windows program, I run
> my mouse cursor to the bottom of the screen, and I get the start button.
> Programs->Microsoft Office->Visio, and Visio is running in a window on
> my otherwise Linux screen.  All without any complicated network setups.
> All I have to do is start VBox (I have it as a shortcut on my AWN bar).
> If Windows comes up in the normal bounding box, I just press ctrl-L and
> Windows hides itself.

I forget the details, but I seem to recall that we went with kvm over
VirtualBox because the latter _required_ an X11 GUI, and of course
many server implementations don't want to even install X11.

> > >>> Of course, all the really cool tools are in the paid version.
> > > I don't know about that... 
> > 
> > Er... You wrote that, didn't you? Or did I get my quoting messed up?
> No, I never said that, if I did, it was a mistake.  All the cool
> Enterprise tools are in the paid version.  The free version is excellent
> for the average user, and Joe Average is who we should be talking about
> here.

Uh, you could check.  I did, and you did say it, in your message
posted 2008-03-14 06:29 MDT.  And you continue to say that the cool
tools for Enterprise are in the paid version.  Ubuntu is about
enterprises as well as Joe Average, and forcing Joe Average to use a
different virtualization strategy when he gets big is not the Ubuntu
way.

I've deleted a bunch of other discussion which all assumes that kvm
won't run on old hardware.  If that isn't working in your environment,
as noted at the beginning, let's get the bug reported and fixed.

Neal McBurnett                 http://mcburnett.org/neal/